Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

Topic: Spot Summary: Graph Paper Euclidean Geometry with 10^-603 holes &
10^-604 Number-points #1283 Correcting Math 3rd ed

Replies: 4   Last Post: Nov 13, 2012 10:34 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
adamk

Posts: 1,492
Registered: 8/15/09
Re: Spot Summary: Graph Paper Euclidean Geometry with 10^-603 holes & 10^-604 Number-points #1283 Correcting Math 3rd ed
Posted: Nov 13, 2012 9:43 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

> Let me pause for a moment with a spot-summary.
>
> In Physics we have the smallest reality as a atom.
> The atom has
> subatomic particles, but still the atom is the
> smallest item of
> physics. Everything that is subatomic has no reality
> save for the fact
> that atoms exist. Analogy: humans are the smallest
> human item, for we
> do not think of human hands or human eyes or human
> livers as smaller
> independent items.
>
> In Mathematics the smallest item is a point and line
> where a line
> consists of points.
>
> In Old Math, they started out their Geometry with
> axioms that claimed
> a point has no extent, no length, no width, no
> breath. And another
> axiom that said a line has length but no width, no
> breadth. Funny how
> they attributed length to a line in an axiom but no
> width or no
> breadth. And if any mathematician had been really
> alert would have
> been repelled by such lack of logic.
>
> In New Math, we start out with the axioms of Old
> Math, but then we
> clean house afterwards. We reexamine them
> and realize that the Ellipsoid of Elliptic Geometry
> provides us with a
> "line" that serves as the line in the Euclidean
> Geometry. We realize
> finite with infinity has a borderline that is a
> number itself--
> pi*10^603 and that then forces the smallest positive
> Real number to be
> the inverse of the borderline number. That then,
> forces there to be
> holes or gaps between successive Reals and that all
> the Reals from 0
> to pi*10^603 is this set:
>
> 0, 1/10^603, 2/10^603, 3/10^603, . . pi*10^603
>
> So now, we see there is a hole or gap between two
> successive Reals of
> a metric of 10^-603 (using the abbreviation of
> infinity as 10^603)
>
> Now in a proof that at 10^603 the three zero digits
> in a row in
> truncated pi allow for the surface area of the
> Ellipsoid, the longest
> and thinnest ellipsoid possible is one in which its
> length is 10^603
> while both its width and breadth are 10^-603. And
> that surface area is
> in total 12 square units.
>
> This gives us a metric of the size of a Number point
> in mathematics to
> be about 10^-604.
>
> So we have holes between Successive Number points of
> 10^-603 and we
> have Number Points as tiny circles of 10^-604 (also
> for 3rd
> dimension). We also then, have the line width and
> breadth to be
> 10^-604.
>
> So that in Geometry, like Physics, we have the
> smallest things as
> atoms and then are composed of subatomic particles
> like neutrons,
> protons, electrons, neutrinos, photons and gobs and
> gobs of other
> particles, all because the atom itself is the
> smallest item in
> physics. In Geometry we have the same sort of pattern
> that we have an
> entire Geometry such as Euclidean or Elliptic or
> Hyperbolic and we
> have subgeometry of points and lines.
>
> The overall geometry itself gives us the subgeometry
> of points and
> lines and points and lines have length, width and
> breadth.
>
> So we start with Numbers and fetch the borderline
> between Finite and
> Infinite. Once that is fetched we take the inverse of
> it as the
> smallest nonzero number. That gives us the measure of
> the holes or
> gaps between numbers. Then we go to Elliptic Geometry
> to find the
> longest yet thinnest possible figure and it is a
> ellipsoid and given
> the constraints of the infinity borderline, we find
> out the metric
> measure of its smallest surface area.
>
> We use that to figure out the metric of the "line and
> the point" for
> geometry, whether Euclidean, Elliptic or Hyperbolic.
>
> We can use the Ellipsoid formula of this:
>
> S approx equal to 4pi ((a^p*b^p + a^p*c^p + b^p*
> c^p)/ 3)^1/p
>
> Where the a, b, c are axes and the p is a value that
> is
> the golden ratio, the phi constant of 1.618..


The phi constant does not exist in your system, idiot.

>
> Keep in mind the pi and phi are truncated at the
> 603rd digit
> rightwards of the decimal point so that the above
> formula no longer is
> approx but rather ends up being thoroughly equal.


False. You need Phi to equal k* 10^(-603) , or the

number Phi does not exist in your system; it falls

within the gaps of your idiotic number system -- and

this is not the case. Same thing for Pi, which does not

exist in your system, nor e, nor....

So yours is a truly useful "correction", imbecile.

> The reason infinity borderline is pi to the 603rd
> digit truncated is
> because that formula becomes exactitude and no longer
> approximation.
>
> I used to have access to a supercomputer, but no
> longer, but if
> someone does have access and is willing to compute, I
> am confident
> (not certain) that if pi, phi truncated that the
> formula renders
> equality and no longer approximation.


Of course, you offer nothing for someone else's work,

right after calling everyone here a faker. Yes, let me

run to work for you, so you can keep insulting me.
>
> But the overall gist of the summary is important
> because no longer is
> mathematics stifled by axioms that say a line and
> point are
> "abstractions", but rather they are part and parcel
> of the geometry
> itself and require, demand to have not just length
> but width and
> breadth. In Old Math, they never had a borderline
> with finite to
> infinite and so were never able to assemble what the
> width and breadth
> of a point or line was. In New Math we put aside that
> encumbrance and
> we fill out mathematics that requires filling.


for feeble minds like yours.
>
> The atom in Physics was an abstraction up until the
> advent of modern
> chemistry when it was apparent that these tiny
> entities had to have
> length, width, breadth and substance. It is about
> time that
> mathematics grows up and grows out of its shell of
> hiding behind
> "abstraction".


As usual, you miss the point.
>
> Google's New-Newsgroups censors AP posts but Drexel's
> Math Forum does
> not and my posts in archive form is seen here:


Using your link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5lsDM3DyBs
>
> http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986
>
> Archimedes Plutonium
> http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
> whole entire Universe is just one big atom
> where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies




Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.